Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways

Title of Southeastern (train operating company, 2006–2021)

I asked if another title would be suitable. Please respond to that articles talk page and not here. JuniperChill (talk) 18:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC) (not an official RM btw) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JuniperChill (talk • contribs) 18:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Edits by Skivermac16111994

• Skivermac16111994 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

I know this is not the place to be discussing user problems, but has anyone else been noticing problematic editing by this user, specifically in edits to railway stations, TOCs, and List of companies operating trains in the United Kingdom that might seem like nonsense? I've already given them a final warning about using edit summaries, since all of their edits don't use one, but I'm not inclined to send them to an administrative venue. Does anyone have any opinions on this issue? Jalen Folf (Bark[s]) 19:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

I've noticed similar issues where the user is making unexplained edits to pages that in many cases, involve introducing incorrect or nonsense information to articles. I've done my best to correct as many as possible but I do wonder if potential administrative assistance could be beneficial due to their continued failure to comply? Aaroncrudge (talk) 18:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I have already warned them of WP:CIR, but it looks like they didn't get the memo. I won't be opposed to administration taking notice. Jalen Folf (Bark[s]) 22:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I honestly think that may be the best/only option now. We've all tried to warn them on multiple occasions which have all been unsuccessful and we shouldn't have to be correcting and reverting edits that are damaging the articles impacted. I'd definitely support administration getting involved if we agreed it was the best option. Aaroncrudge (talk) 08:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Indeed as concerned, per the discussion above (now archived). DankJae 12:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Infobox image captions

Following some back-and-forth editing on GWR loco classes, I started this thread on Talk:GWR 4073 Class (hence the GWR joke). I have moved it here as suggested by @Danners430, to get a wider perspective. For reference, here are links to WP:CAPTION and - specific to Infoboxes - MOS:CAPLENGTH: note the distinction between succinctness and brevity. Also pinging @Murgatroyd49.

Can we come to some consensus about what infobox image captions should contain? It may be assumed that the image represents the subject of the article, but a caption that just says (in effect) 'This is a picture of <subject>' isn't adding anything helpful. Also, clicking through to the image page will give more information, but not every reader knows that or wants to interrupt their reading of the article to do that. In relation to locomotives, I suggest:

• Even though 'all GWR locos look the same' (joke) , there were detail differences between members of the same class, therefore it is not only interesting, but useful, to know which specific loco is pictured. (I personally dislike pictures - eg many calendars - that do not identify the loco.)
• Individual locomotives were modified over time, so knowing the date of the picture is relevant. (Also, locos in preservation, while providing better pictures in many cases, may not be representative or may have modern modifications.)
• The location is not needed, unless it is significant to the loco (eg Caerphilly Castle at the British Empire Exhibition in 1923)

These are my opinions, which I think do not conflict with any rules or guidelines. Agree or differ as you feel moved. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 19:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

• Absolutely "GWR No. 4079 Pendennis Castle at Didcot Railway Centre in 2023" (which it was, but then reverted). Or even "4079 Pendennis Castle at Didcot Railway Centre in 2023" if we want to be as minimal as viable, because the rest is obvious and implicit, but its identity as Pendennis Castle is relevant and of interest to the reader. More so, in fact, than it being at Didcot, or in 2023 (AFAIK 2023 isn't a significant year for it). Andy Dingley (talk) 21:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

  2023 is relevant, being the year it's overhaul was completed and its first return to steam after its return from Oz. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 07:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

• Then in that case, 2023 definitely belongs (even if the reason isn't expanded in the caption). Andy Dingley (talk) 07:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

  Though, as you say the reference to Didcot is superfluous. I'd recommend "4079 Pendennis Castle in 2023" as a succint caption. The GWR bit can be taken as read as that is what the article is about. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 07:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I would say it’s worth having a broader discussion about infobox captions instead of just focussing on the one example… would it be worth deciding on some kind of “standard” format? Danners430 (talk) 08:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Problem with a "standard" format is that each example is context dependent. In the above example; you don't need the reference to GWR as the article is about a class of GWR locos. However use in another article might make the identification as a GWR loco relevant. The guidelines at WP:CAPTION and MOS:CAPLENGTH should be sufficient for most purposes. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Severn Valley Railway map

I have proposed that the map in the Severn Valley Railway article should be edited to remove the excessive detail north of Bridgnorth so that it correctly reflects the subject of the article, the heritage railway. Please respond to that article's talk page and not here. Robin84F (talk) 09:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Ultra (rapid transit)#Requested move 29 April 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ultra (rapid transit)#Requested move 29 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 15:20, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Sheffield–Lincoln line station query.

Moved from User talk:Useddenim

Within the last year, a contributor had added Sturtom station (shown in red) that was situated between Gainsborugh North Junction and Clarborough Junction, east of Retford. Quick shows it opening on 11th July 1849 and closing on 2nd February 1959. That line section was once part of the Sheffield and Lincolnshire Junction Railway.

Would it be possible for a Wikipedia article be opened on this station, as at the age of 79, such matters are beyond me.

Xenophon Philosopher (talk) 11:38, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done, but as Sturton railway station. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)